Skip to main content

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: swamprabbit Date: Nov 23, 2007 11:33am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Post Brent years

If you compare the Vince Years to 1972 of course this era is going to come up short. But there is actually a lot of good music here. It is probably more fair to compare 90's Dead to other acts from that era. In this case, the Dead's music from this time period was splendid. Just go listen to 10/1/94. Is it as good as Cornell 77? NO! Is it still a marvelous, emotional show? YES! Although I would have loved to have been at some of the classic early shows, I am kind of glad I joined the party late (first show in 1991). I am able to look back over the entire history of Dead music and enjoy it in its totality. I feel that most of the harsh criticism of certain eras (Brent years, Vince years, etc.) is usually just an excuse for folks to brag about their Dead credentials ("I was here first - back when it was cool.") All I can say is I'm glad I got to experience the magic. I was fortunate that I knew some seasoned older Heads who helped turn me on to the music rather than ripping apart a band they professed to love. Long live the Grateful Dead 1965-1995!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: laptaper Date: Nov 23, 2007 6:24pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Post Brent years

Man, you just ripped the curtain down and exposed the wizened cretin of ego that caused this whole thread! Full marks. All about the poster and not about the Dead. Just an insecure ghoul's excuse to piss on other people's tastes - kind of like people who go to the opera only so they can complain loudly after it's over how awful it was, so everyone will know what connoisseurs they are. To people they don't know from Adam, even. I mean, how pathetic can you get?

Oh, peace, love, etc. ;-ppp